A 380. caliber
firearm loaded with five rounds and one chambered was discovered strapped to a
passenger’s ankle after walking through a metal detector at Cincinnati (CVG).

A loaded 380.
caliber firearm with a round chambered was discovered in the rear pocket of a
San Antonio (SAT) passenger during Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) screening.

A 380. caliber
firearm loaded with five rounds was discovered after a passenger walked through
a metal detector at Dallas – Ft. Worth (DFW).

51Firearms Discovered This Week
– Of the 51 firearms, 45 were loaded and 20 had rounds
chambered. See a complete list and more photos at the bottom of this post.

Seal Deterrent (ADQ)

Seal Deterrent - A Seal deterrent
was discovered in a passenger’s carry-on bag at Kodiak (ADQ). - A seal
bomb is a small explosive device resembling a firecracker that is used
underwater in order to frighten mammals away from fishing grounds.

Burning Book (PHX)

Burning Book – This magic gag item was discovered in a checked bag at Phoenix (PHX). While the safety of a burning
book in baggage can surely be questioned, our officers were concerned for other
reasons. It resembles an improvised explosive device.

Inert
Ordnance and Grenades etc.
– We continue to find inert hand grenades and other weaponry on a weekly basis.
Please keep in mind that if an item looks like a real bomb, grenade, mine,
etc., it is prohibited. When these items are found at a checkpoint or in
checked baggage, they can cause significant delays because the bomb squad or
explosives detection professionals must come to resolve the alarm to determine
they’re not a threat. Even if they are novelty items, you cannot bring them on
a plane. Read
here on why inert items cause problems.

Two
inert artillery shells were discovered in a checked bag at Chicago O’Hare
(ORD). Two minors were returning from Europe and had found the shells at a
French WWI era artillery range.

Four
inert/replica/novelty grenades were discovered in carry-on bags this week. Two
were discovered in Atlanta (ATL), and the others were found at Baltimore (BWI),
and Oklahoma City (OKC).

Inert WWI Artillery Shells (ORD) - Inert Grenade (BWI)

Artfully
Concealed Prohibited Items –
It’s important to examine your bags prior to traveling to ensure prohibited
items are not inside. If a prohibited item is discovered in your bag or on your
body, you could be cited and possibly arrested by local law enforcement. Here
are a few examples from this week where prohibited items were found by our
officers in strange places.

Two
razor blades were detected inside the shoe and wallet of a Cincinnati (CVG)
passenger.

A
6-inch saw blade was detected, concealed inside a bible at Orlando (MCO).

Three
box cutter blades were detected concealed in a shoe inside the carry-on bag of
a Baton Rouge passenger.

Nine credit card knives were
discovered this week. Three were discovered at Kansas City (MCI), three more at
Oakland (OAK),
and the remainder were discovered at Central Wisconsin (CWA), Minot
(MOT), and Sonoma (STS). Check
out this blog post for more information on
credit card knives.

Ammunition – When packed
properly, ammunition can be transported in your checked baggage, but it is
never permissible to pack ammo in your carry-on bag.

Firearms
Discovered This Week in Carry-On Bags

Guns Discovered at - L-R / T-B: ABQ, LAX, RSW, GSP, BZN, GSO, GSP

Guns Discovered at - L-R / T-B: ICT, LAS, CRP

*In
order to provide a timely weekly update, this data is compiled from a
preliminary report. The year-end numbers will vary slightly from what is
reported in the weekly updates. However, any monthly, midyear, or end-of-year
numbers TSA provides on this blog or elsewhere will be actual numbers and not
estimates.

Unfortunately
these sorts of occurrences are all too frequent which is why we talk about
these finds. Sure, it’s great to share the things that our officers are
finding, but at the same time, each time we find a dangerous item, the line is
slowed down and a passenger that likely had no ill intent ends up with a
citation or in some cases is even arrested. The passenger can face a penalty as
high as $7,500.00. This is a friendly reminder to please leave these
items at home. Just because we find a prohibited item on an individual does not
mean they had bad intentions, that's for the law enforcement officer to decide.
In many cases, people simply forgot they had these items.

Artillery shells dating back to WWI from France? Gee, gotta wonder what else the folks in France have let into the United States? Good job TSA, just hope the folks that discovered the shells got reimbursed for their damaged undies.

President Obama has stated that having to show ID is a racist act. TSA requires travelers to show ID just to travel which is a constitutional right as determined by the United States Supreme Court. Since TSA can show no corelation of showing ID and increased traveler safety one has to wonder why TSA is engaged in racist practices?

Note that two of the three guns you discovered on persons were detected using good old metal detectors. In fact, you were lucky the guy with the gun on his ankle went through a metal detector, because objects on the side of bodies can easily go undetected using full body scanners. Since full body scanners are used for most people, the fact that you found two guns with metal detectors confirms what the methodological characteristics of full body scanners determine: they are worse at detecting guns than metal detectors.

The question is why are you still using these slow, invasive, expensive and ineffective machines???

Susan Richart said...I guess we can write off the claim that comments are put up within 24-48 hours. Really, this blog needs to dig a big hole and bury itself. It's useless.screen shot/DHS OIG statementApril 12, 2014 at 8:56 AM.....................................................These TSA types are very boastful but continue to be unable to produce results.

RB--I hope you don't really think that everyone in the TSA is stupid. Seems a bit prejudice to me. Since my initials are RB also, I hope the rest of the people on the blog don't think all of us who are "RBs" are incapable of formulating a credible argument. Because you have no use for the blog doesn't mean the rest of us don't. Please feel free to exercise your 1st amendment rights by not reading the blog. TSA--thanks for your efforts.

Blotter Bob wrote, "Burning Book – This magic gag item was discovered in a checked bag at Phoenix (PHX). While the safety of a burning book in baggage can surely be questioned, our officers were concerned for other reasons. It resembles an improvised explosive device."

So a potentially valid reason, accidental fire, was NOT the reason screeners confiscated this private property. The screeners grabbed because it "LOOKED LIKE AN IED?"

I'd laugh if I wasn't so disgusted by the pathetic excuses screeners give for seizing our property in the name of the United States of Fear.

A joke book is not an IED. No passenger seeing a joke book would think it was an IED, even if a stupid hoaxster claimed it was.

Your support of private property confiscation for the most ridiculous excuses is abnormal, blotter team.

It's discouraging to read posts critical of many TSA policies with good reason and then to think that nothing will be done to change policies or to,respond to,criticism For example, there is sufficient evidence that radiation is delivered by body scanners. Few if any comments here support their use . Yet it is unlikely to change . The manufacturers have a strong lobby is but one of many reasons.one can only hope that as criticsms mount changes will be made. I hope,so.

I continue to wait for some justification for active duty military being included in pre-check, but not retired military or holders of current DoD or LE background investigations. military retirees have at least 20 years documented service to this Nation, pretty much proving their lack of risk. both DoD and LE background investigations should reveal any risk factors. active duty military do not, necessarily, have a background check or any significant length of service. neither citizenship nor a background investigation is required to enlist in the military, in fact there are likely illegal immigrants serving. if it is really about safety, then why are potentially unscreened non-citizens allowed through? sounds like it is just pandering to an admirable group to get PR, not adjusting the rules to ease screening on those who present a lower likelihood of threat.Let me be clear: pre-911 screening should be the norm. it is all that is required, now that cockpit doors have been reinforced and locked, and flight crews and passengers know that the rules have changed and passivity=death. however, if we are going to continue this massive waste of tax dollars on security theatre, at least have _some_ of the rules make sense.

It is outrageous that DHS/TSA is allowed to decide if I am "worthy" of exercising my right to fly when the Federal Air Marshal director is stepping down due to the corrupt purchase and distribution of firearms. (Link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/11/air-marshal-director-probe-over-gun-scheme/) The public does not yet know which officials he distributed guns to, but identifying these recipients is sure to only make the picture of DHS/TSA corruption worse! An organization that is corrupt at the highest levels of its leadership has no business making calls about whether or not would-be passengers are security threats. An organization led by people who essentially traffic in guns has no business confiscating others' guns. It's hypocritical to a criminal degree! Such an organization has no business overseeing anything related to security. I am contacting my elected officials immediately.

Anonymous Anonymous said...It's discouraging to read posts critical of many TSA policies with good reason and then to think that nothing will be done to change policies or to,respond to,criticism For example, there is sufficient evidence that radiation is delivered by body scanners. Few if any comments here support their use . Yet it is unlikely to change . The manufacturers have a strong lobby is but one of many reasons.one can only hope that as criticsms mount changes will be made. I hope,so.

April 13, 2014 at 11:46 PM.......................

Anon Anon, I am generally recognized as not being particularly supportive of TSA.

Links between former DHS/TSA employees and the companies that sell technology to government is very strong. Formenr DHS Secretary Chertoff is a fine example. If Congress wasn't bogged down in other investigations I think this area would be ripe for picking.

Currently TSA is not using X-ray based Whole Body Scannesr just Millimeter Wave units. TSA didn't pull the x-ray scanners over the safety of victims, while they should have, but because the manufacturers could not make the Privacy Filters work with these machines.

Do understand that TSA can bring back X-ray based Whole Body scanners just as soon as the privacy filter issue is resolved and then continue to irradiate the public without the least bit of concern for our health and safety.

TSA hides behind a cloak of secrecy in order to protect the employees of TSA from legal action after abusing the public, right up the the head man, John S. Pistole.

This article from late last year tell the story of why TSA is the wrong solution for airport security.

TSA is not the correct solution for airport security operations.

TSA cost taxpayers in excess of $8 Billion Dollars each year and we get very little ROI.

TSA has mismanaged human assets, abused the public, and in general worn out its welcome in this country and our airports.

Hey West, you told Jon in the comments from the ID post on April 9, 2013, "Take the expired ID with you Jon, and if there is some problem with verifying the ID for clearing into the checkpoint, there is a process in place to help you get through."

So as long as you are a man, you can get thru TSA screening with an expired ID? Guess Sherry Wright didn't meet the genital requirement, and since she is a mute, minority stroke survivor, she wouldn't qualify anyway, at least according to the TSA screener who denied her boarding.

Yeah, show the compassion of the TSA by converting a quick plane trip for a wheelchair-bound woman to an 8-hr bus ride. Was a TSA vipper team around to harass her at the bus station too?

Anonymous said...Hey West, you told Jon in the comments from the ID post on April 9, 2013, "Take the expired ID with you Jon, and if there is some problem with verifying the ID for clearing into the checkpoint, there is a process in place to help you get through."

So as long as you are a man, you can get thru TSA screening with an expired ID? Guess Sherry Wright didn't meet the genital requirement, and since she is a mute, minority stroke survivor, she wouldn't qualify anyway, at least according to the TSA screener who denied her boarding.

Yeah, show the compassion of the TSA by converting a quick plane trip for a wheelchair-bound woman to an 8-hr bus ride. Was a TSA vipper team around to harass her at the bus station too?

*screenshot taken* Reply?

April 14, 2014 at 10:07 PM..................................

Anon, we get lots of stuff from the TSA Blog Team that just isn't true.

Little things like claims that Whole Body Imagers are safe for people with Insulin Pumps to use when some manufacturers say exactly opposite of that.

Or as now proven not having "acceptable" ID apparently voids the alternative procedures TSA crows about.

But, a bigger issue is why does a person have to show any ID to TSA in the first place?

Names are matched to the various Watch Lists by the airlines when purchasing a ticket as required by TSA.

Showing ID to the TSA ID checker does nothing to improve security unless TSA is willing to admit that the screening for WEI is a defective process.

I would like TSA to explain how showing and ID to a clerk improves the screening for WEI especially when that ID is not compared to any Watch Lists.

The fact remains that travel is a Right and that TSA is interfering in exercise of the Right.

Having to show ID to TSA accomplishes nothing and infringes on a persons ability to travel freely in our country.

Anonymous said... RB--I hope you don't really think that everyone in the TSA is stupid. Seems a bit prejudice to me. Since my initials are RB also, I hope the rest of the people on the blog don't think all of us who are "RBs" are incapable of formulating a credible argument. Because you have no use for the blog doesn't mean the rest of us don't. Please feel free to exercise your 1st amendment rights by not reading the blog. TSA--thanks for your efforts.

no response rb? it appears that you are just as selective as tsa when deciding which posts you would care to comment on...

no response rb? it appears that you are just as selective as tsa when deciding which posts you would care to comment on...April 16, 2014 at 4:48 AM-------------I don't recall seeing the original post. Can you point to it?

No I don't think everyone in TSA is stupid but they sure act it a lot.

Anonymous said...RB--I hope you don't really think that everyone in the TSA is stupid. Seems a bit prejudice to me. Since my initials are RB also, I hope the rest of the people on the blog don't think all of us who are "RBs" are incapable of formulating a credible argument. Because you have no use for the blog doesn't mean the rest of us don't. Please feel free to exercise your 1st amendment rights by not reading the blog. TSA--thanks for your efforts.April 13, 2014 at 3:36 PM---------------------------------I'm curious when your post actually appeared on the blog. I try to follow active threads and I honestly didn't see this one until now.

When TSA keeps doing the same wrong things over and over while expecting the results to be different then I think a case for stupidity can be made. The question is to what degree.

The day that TSA responds in a meaningful way to complaints I've filed will be the day I cut back on my critique of TSA. Until then you're welcomed to use your 1st amendments rights to not read my posts or respond unless you just can't help yourself.

To the TSAnonymous who tried to tell RB not to read this blog, please go read the 1st amendment again. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

The 1st Amendment doesn't give RB the right to not read a government blog. It instead gives us all the right to speak without interference or punishment by the government.

Funny how your right to comment on a government website was interfered with by your co-workers. They delayed your comment so long, the person you were allowed to attack (against comment policy?) missed it until you attacked him again.